Ontology of Close Human-Nature Relationships
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
University of New Hampshire University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository Doctoral Dissertations Student Scholarship Spring 2016 Ontology of Close Human-Nature Relationships Neil H. Kessler University of New Hampshire, Durham Follow this and additional works at: https://scholars.unh.edu/dissertation Recommended Citation Kessler, Neil H., "Ontology of Close Human-Nature Relationships" (2016). Doctoral Dissertations. 2256. https://scholars.unh.edu/dissertation/2256 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Scholarship at University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized administrator of University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ONTOLOGY OF CLOSE HUMAN-NATURE RELATIONSHIPS BY NEIL H. KESSLER B.A., Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA, 1989 M.S., University of Vermont, Burlington, VT, 1996 DISSERTATION Submitted to the University of New Hampshire in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Natural Resources and Environmental Studies May, 2016 This dissertation has been examined and approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Natural Resources and Earth Systems Science by: Dissertation Chair, John Carroll, Professor Department of Natural Resources and the Environment Eleanor Abrams, Professor Department of Education Tom Lee, Associate Professor Department of Natural Resources and the Environment Barbara Houston, Professor Emerita Department of Education Jayson, Seaman, Associate Professor Department of Kinesiology On March, 30, 2016 Original approval signatures are on file with the University of New Hampshire Graduate School. ii DEDICATION To my wife, Mariya, for her love, care and encouragement, and for supporting me through the long odyssey this dissertation became. To my kids, Max and Rosie, for listening to the birds with me. To Martín and Hanna Prechtel, for their teaching, limitless generosity and dedication to teaching students like me about what is really happening out there. To Eleanor and Marilyn, whose very way of carrying themselves through this magical the world is an inspiration. To my family in Philadelphia, for keeping me going through it all with laughter and love. To all the nonhuman beings out there with whom I’ve been close or have tried. Thank you for putting up with me and showing me all the amazing things that you have. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my committee members for seeing me through this rigorous process with care, joy and patience. Though having stated this orally in my dissertation defense, I’d like first to thank my advisor, John Carroll for his open-mindedness and encouragement to write whatever it was that was important to me. I’d like to thank Eleanor Abrams, whose insight into indigenous thinking and excitement at my project proved invaluable. I’d like to thank Jayson Seaman, for whom what “they say” is anathema—thank you for being an intellectually courageous, kindred spirit. I’d like to thank Tom Lee for bringing the keen-eyed ecologist’s eye to my work. And I’d like to thank Barbara Houston, who exhorted me and all of her students to “fail boldly.” Without your open-mindedness and encouragement this dissertation would never have been. I would also like to thank my greatest teacher, Martín Prechtel. His strength and tenacity literally pried open my modern mind to thinking about the human-nature relationship in the ways I have attempted to show in these pages. This dissertation would have been inconceivable without his kindness, generosity, and insistence on trying to crack the hard shell of the modern world that blinds us to the possibilities of true belonging. I would also like to thank the wonderful people at the Wild Rockies Field Institute in Missoula, Montana. If not for the opportunity to teach their one-of-a-kind field courses, I never would have traveled as far down this wild road as I have. I would like to thank the poet Mary Oliver, who speaks of the nonhuman world with a clarion bell of beauty that I dream, at times, of replicating. I would like thank all the little stones, sitting alone in the moonlight. May you not be so lonely, unless that is what you desire to be. I’d like to thank the iron-black stallion in the field in Paonia, Colorado, for shooting me straight through with the power of his voice. Finally, I’d like to thank the birds. iv All of them. The pigeons on the city streets with their maple-bud red legs and shimmering necks. The poor starlings, who’ve done nothing more than glitter like a Milky-way encrusted sky as they follow us humans from place to place. The chickadees who refuse to be banded easily. The Red-tailed Hawks, inscribing their brawny weightlessness on the dawnlit skies. The Red-bellied Woodpecker couple up the street from my house, who showed me so many things that first Spring in this neighborhood. And all the Titmouses, their flint-capped tenacity and gregariousness a thread that weaves together the woods around my house on a daily basis. It is because of all of you that I have the desire to speak so that someday it might become common knowledge that with you we can converse. v LIST OF FIGURES 1. Close Interhuman Relationship Diagram showing interaction of Affect, Thought and Action vectors between two persons. Reprinted from Close Relationships (p. 28), by Kelley et al., 1983, New York: W.H. Freeman.................................................................... 34 2. Initial interaction between Walker and Blue. Shows link between Blue's feelings and Walker's thoughts about them. ............................................................................................. 39 3. Interdependence of Walker and Blue. Shows comingling of thoughts and feelings between Walker and Blue when Blue is in love with his mate. ......................................................... 40 4. Interaction of Walker and Blue after removal of Blue’s mate. Interaction shows emotional and cognitive interdependence leading to disgust and hatred. ............................................. 43 5. Adapted Close Relationship Diagram from Kelley et al. (1983). Reciprocial nonhuman actions removed. .................................................................................................................. 51 6. Adapted Close Relationship Diagram from Kelley et al. (1983), with nonhuman thoughts and feelings also removed. ................................................................................................... 53 7. Three “Pillars" View of Sustainability. .............................................................................. 109 8. Environment as Ontological Context for Economic and Social Pillars. ............................ 110 9. Human-Nature Relational View of the Three Pillars of Sustainability. ............................ 111 10. Aristotle's Substance as ontologically independent, with relations that depend upon it for existence. ............................................................................................................................ 151 11. Relations with superseding ontology, and substances that depend upon them for their existence. ............................................................................................................................ 152 12. Ontologically material representation of shared feelings. ................................................. 215 13. Possible alignments of epistemology and ontology in theories of animism. ..................... 262 14. Eco-friendliness Rebuffed ................................................................................................. 279 15. Diagram of Emergentism. .................................................................................................. 293 vi TABLE OF CONTENTS DEDICATION ...................................................................................................................... iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .................................................................................................. iv LIST OF FIGURES .............................................................................................................. vi ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................x INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................1 Environmental Problems as Problems of Relationship .......................................................3 ‘Human,’ ‘Nature,’ and ‘Human-Nature Relationships’ ....................................................8 Parallels Between Interhuman and Human-Nature Relationships ....................................10 Close Human-Nature Relationships ..................................................................................11 Existing Human-Nature Relationship Theories ................................................................16 Experiences of Closeness Through an Ecofeminist/ Pragmatist Lens ..............................18 Influence of Ecofeminist Dualisms on Human-Nature Relationship Theories ................19 Chapter Overview .............................................................................................................24 Critical Lens ..................................................................................................25